Search

Background: Associations of the strength of school smoking policies with cigarette, e-cigarette and cannabis use in Wales were examined. Methods: Nationally representative cross-sectional survey of pupils aged 11-16 years (N=7376) in Wales. Senior management team members from 67 schools completed questionnaires about school smoking policies, substance use education and tobacco cessation initiatives. Multi-level, logistic regression analyses investigated self-reported cigarette, e-cigarette and cannabis use, for all students and those aged 15-16 years. Results: Prevalence of current smoking, e-cigarette use and cannabis use in the past month were 5.3%, 11.5% and 2.9%, respectively. Of schools that provided details about smoking policies (66/67), 39.4% were strong (written policy applied to everyone in all locations), 43.9% were moderate (written policy not applied to everyone in all locations) and 16.7% had no written policy. There was no evidence of an association of school smoking policies with pupils' tobacco or e-cigarette use. However, students from schools with a moderate policy [OR = 0.47; 95% (confidence interval) CI: 0.26-0.84] were less likely to have used cannabis in the past month compared to schools with no written policy. This trend was stronger for students aged 15-16 years (moderate policy: OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.22-0.80; strong policy: OR= 0.45; 95% CI: 0.23-0.87). Conclusions: School smoking policies may exert less influence on young people's smoking behaviours than they did during times of higher adolescent smoking prevalence. Longitudinal studies are needed to examine the potential influence of school smoking policies on cannabis use and mechanisms explaining this association. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adapting interventions that have worked elsewhere can save resources associated with developing new interventions for each specific context. While a developing body of evidence shows benefits of adapted interventions compared with interventions transported without adaptation, there are also examples of interventions which have been extensively adapted, yet have not worked in the new context. Decisions on when, to what extent, and how to adapt interventions therefore are not straightforward, particularly when conceptualising intervention effects as contingent upon contextual interactions in complex systems. No guidance currently addresses these questions comprehensively. To inform development of an overarching guidance on adaptation of complex population health interventions, this systematic review synthesises the content of the existing guidance papers.Methods: We searched for papers published between January 2000 and October 2018 in 7 bibliographic databases. We used citation tracking and contacted authors and experts to locate further papers. We double screened all the identified records. We extracted data into the following categories: descriptive information, key concepts and definitions, rationale for adaptation, aspects of adaptation, process of adaptation, evaluating and reporting adapted interventions. Data extraction was conducted independently by two reviewers, and retrieved data were synthesised thematically within pre-specified and emergent categories.Results: We retrieved 6694 unique records. Thirty-eight papers were included in the review representing 35 sources of guidance. Most papers were developed in the USA in the context of implementing evidence-informed interventions among different population groups within the country, such as minority populations. We found much agreement on how the papers defined key concepts, aims, and procedures of adaptation, including involvement of key stakeholders, but also identified gaps in scope, conceptualisation, and operationalisation in several categories.Conclusions: Our review found limitations that should be addressed in future guidance on adaptation. Specifically, future guidance needs to be reflective of adaptations in the context of transferring interventions across countries, including macro- (e.g. national-) level interventions, better theorise the role of intervention mechanisms and contextual interactions in the replicability of effects and accordingly conceptualise key concepts, such as fidelity to intervention functions, and finally, suggest evidence-informed strategies for adaptation re-evaluation and reporting.Trial Registration: PROSPERO 2018, CRD42018112714. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Growth of e-cigarette use among smokers has raised concerns over uptake by non-smokers, particularly young people. Legislative changes aimed in part at reducing youth exposure to e-cigarettes include the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). A core justification for such measures is the belief that e-cigarettes can lead to tobacco smoking through mechanisms of renormalisation including: mimicking and normalizing the act of smoking; increasing product acceptability via marketing; nicotine exposure. These mechanisms are here explored in relation to findings from qualitative research.Methods: This paper reports results from twenty-one group interviews with 14-15 year olds in Wales, England and Scotland, conducted as part of an ongoing evaluation of the impact of the TPD on youth smoking and e-cigarette use. Interviews were conducted around the end of the transitional period for TPD implementation, and explored perceptions of e-cigarettes and tobacco, as well as similarities and differences between them.Results: Young people differentiated between tobacco and e-cigarettes, rejecting the term e-cigarette in favour of alternatives such as 'vapes'. Experimental or occasional use was common and generally approved of where occurring within social activity with peers. However, regular use outside of this context was widely disapproved of, unless for the purpose of stopping smoking. Increased prevalence of e-cigarettes did not challenge strongly negative views of smoking or reduce perceived harms caused by it, with disapproval of smoking remaining high. Nicotine use was variable, with flavour a stronger driver for choice of e-liquid, and interest more generally.Conclusion: The extent to which participants differentiated between vaping and smoking, including styles and reasons for use in adults and young people; absence of marketing awareness; and continued strong disapproval of smoking provides limited support for some of the potential mechanisms through which e-cigarettes may renormalise smoking. However caution over nicotine exposure is still necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]